1 2025:CGHC:34222 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 2992 of 2025 Ujala Mahila Swa-Sahayata Samuh Through President Shabana Ansari W/o Imamuddin Ansari, Aged About 32 Years, R/o Pump House Korba, District Korba (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Though The Under Education Mahanadi Secretary, Department, Bhawan, Mantralaya Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur (C.G.) 2 - Collector Food Department Branch, Korba, District Korba (C.G.) 3 - Sub Divisional Magistrate (R) Korba District Korba (C.G.) 4 - Block Division Education Officer Korba, District Korba (C.G.) 5 - Manu Kanta Principal Swami Atmananad English School, Balco Korba, District Korba (C.G.) 6 - Ekta Swa Sahayata Samuh Through Its President Sector-3 Balco, District Korba (C.G.) 7 - Kausal Prasad R/o Bhadrapara, Ward No. 40, Balco Nagar, District Korba (C.G.) 8 - Shakun Thakur R/o Bhadrapara, Ward No. 40, Balco Nagar, District Korba (C.G.) 9 - Anil Ratre Member Of Brc Korba District Korba (C.G.) 10 - Deepak Patel Naib Tahsildar Tahsil Korba, District Korba (C.G.) ---- Respondents ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner : Mr. Awadh Tripathi, Advocate. For Respondent-State : Ms. Upasana Mehta, Dy. GA. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Hon'ble Shri Arvind Kumar Verma, Judge Order on Board 18.07.2025 1. This writ petition has been preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking following reliefs: “10.1. That, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow this petition and quash the impugned orders dated may kindly be quash/set-aside the impugned order dated 13.06.2025 (ANNEXURE P/1), impugned order dated 13.06.2025 (ANNEXURE P/2) and impugned order dated 15.04.2025 (ANNEXURE P/3), in the interest of justice. 10.2. That the Hon'ble court may kindly direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue running the mid-day meal program at Government Swami Atmanand School Balco, in the interest of justice. 10.3. Any other relief which deemed fit and proper may also be issued looking to the facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the interest of justice.” 2. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is questioning the impugned order Annexure P/1 & P-2, by which, respondent-authority has terminated the allotment of the mid-day meal order which has been issued in favour of the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that impugned order is a non-speaking order as same has been passed only on the basis of enquiry report and without giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 3 4. Learned State Counsel submits that based on the complaint made with regard to the quality of the food supplied by the petitioner is not upto the mark, the Committee has been constituted to enquire the food quality supplied by the petitioner in the Swami Atmanand English School. The Inquiry Officer has made an enquiry and submitted the report vide Annexure P-3 before the concerned respondent-authority. The Committee has found that there is poor quality of food supplied by the petitioner and, thereafter, respondent-authority has passed the impugned order and detached the petitioner from the work of preparation of Mid-Day-Meal in Swami Atmanand English School, Balco, Korba, District Korba, (CG). Vide Annexure P-3, following suggestion has been given: “सुझाव :- मध्यान्ह भो जन सचांलनकर्ता एवं टीम क बच्चों क सथ एवं स्क ल क प्राचांया एवं स्टीफ क सथ सबध अच्छा ह न चांहिहए एवं बर्ताचां$र्ता वं व्यवंहर ठी(क ह न चांहिहए। एक-दूसर शि,कयार्ता नह- ह न चांहिहए र्ताथ बच्चों क पसद क अन0सर एवं मन क अन0रूप गु0णवंत्तापण भो जन बनया एवं पर स जन चांहिहए परर्ता0 इस हिवंद्यालया म7 इस र्तारह क मह8ल नह- ह9। सचांशिलक द्वार अन्या स्क ल म7 भो$ मध्यान्ह भो जन सचांलक करन क; बर्ता कह$ गुई। अर्ता= हिकस$ एक सस्थान म7 सवं दन म7 ध्यान क7 द्रि@र्ता नह- ह न परिरलक्षिCर्ता ह र्ता ह9। इन सभो$ करण क दखर्ता हुए वंर्तामन मध्यान्ह भो जन सचांशिलर्ताक एवं टीम क बदलकर हिकस$ दूसर महिहल समह क सवं क अवंसर दन उशिचांर्ता प्रार्ता$र्ता ह र्ता ह9। 5. Learned State Counsel further contended that during the enquiry petitioner was not present on the spot, therefore, opportunity of hearing 4 could not be given to him, however, respondent-authorities are ready to re-enquire the matter after providing proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 6. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material/documents available on record including the impugned order. 7. In the earlier round of litigation, vide order dated 25.03.2025 in WPC No.5424/2022, this Court has passed the following order/direction: “Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, at this stage, prima facie, it appears that there is nothing against the petitioner and the petitioner is running the midday meal in accordance with law. The petitioner society may continue the midday meal Programme. However, if any complaint is made against the petitioner, the respondent authorities are at liberty to proceed in accordance with law. 7. With the aforesaid observations/directions, instant writ petition is disposed of” 8. Considering above facts of the case, submissions of counsel for the parties, writ petition is disposed of at this stage permitting the petitioner to submit fresh representation before the concerned respondents- authorities within 15 days and in-turn concerned Authority shall conduct an enquiry regarding testing/verifying the quality of food supplied by the petitioner and also give proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and, thereafter, pass appropriate order on its own merit within 30 days 5 from the date of receipt of copy of such representation. 9. The respondent-authority concerned is directed to permit/allow the petitioner-group to continue the work of preparation of Mid-Day-Meal in the concerned School till the inquiry is completed, however, petitioner- group is also directed to maintain the hygiene and quality of food as per standard of the food Safety. CC as per rules. Sd/- Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge J/-